BAADER SCHULZ LABORATORIES, V. ASST CIT CIR 25(1),

MA 313/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9509 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 22-05-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, B, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL, JM AND RAJENDRA SINGH, AM M.A. NO. 313/MUM/2012 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO. 4688/MUM/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06) BAADER SCHULZ LABORATORIES, SHANTI VILLA, SHANTIVAN TOWER, DEVIDAS LANE, NR. CLUB ACQUARIA, BORIWALI (W), MUMBAI 400 103. PAN: AACFB8402B THE ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, 25(1), ROOM NO. 202, PRATYAKSHAKAR BHAVAN, BANDR-KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA (E). MUMBAI. APPLICANT V/S RESPONDENT DATE OF HEARING : 09- 11-2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09-11-201 2 APPLICANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMA R O R D E R PER DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL (JM) THIS MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR TH E A.Y. 2005-06 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL I N ITA NO. 4688/MUM/2009 DTD. 9-9-2011. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR FILED ANY APPLICATION FOR THE ADJOURNMENT OF THE CASE, TH EREFORE, IT WAS DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THE MISC. APPLICATION EX PARTE, QUA THE ASSESSEE, ON MERITS, AFTER HEARING THE LD. D.R. 3. THE APPLICANT IN THE MISC. APPLICATION DTD. 21-6 -2012 SUPPORTED BY AFFIDAVIT DTD. 18-05-2012 OF MR. KIRTILAL SOMCHAND SHAH, MANAGING PARTNER OF THE FIRM STATED AS UNDER:- MA 313/MUM/2012 2 4. THE APPLICANT SUBMITS WITH GREATEST RESPECT THA T THERE WAS A SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO ATTEND ON THE DATE OF HEARING FIXED ON 9-8-2011. THIS APPEAL WAS ADJOURNED TO 20-01-2011 IN PURSUANCE TO ADJOURNMENT APPLICATION OF THE APPLICANT. HOWEVER, THE BENCH DID NOT FUNCTI ON ON 20-01-2011 AS PER THE CAUSE LIST DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEB SITE. HOWEV ER, THE APPLICANT WAS NOT AWARE THAT THE CASES WERE ADJOURNED TO SOME OTHER D ATES AS NOTIFIED FROM THE BOARD. HENCE, NOBODY COULD ATTEND ON SUBSEQUENT DA TES OF HEARING. THE APPLICANT WAS NOT SERVED WITH ANY NOTICE OF HEARING FIXING THE DATE EITHER 09-06-2011 OR 09-08-2011 IT WAS, THEREFORE, SUBMITTED THAT THE EX-PARTE ORDE R PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL BE RECALLED. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. D.R. DID NOT OBJ ECT TO THE RECALLING OF THE ORDER. 5. WE HAVE CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE RIVAL PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. AFTER HA VING SATISFIED ABOUT THE REASONS SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERING T HE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THERE WAS SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE OF THE ASSESSEE OR HIS AUTHORIZE D REPRESENTATIVE ON THE DATE OF HEARING AND ACCORDINGLY THE EX-PARTE ORDER DTD. 9-8-2011 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL IS RECALLED. THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING IS FIXED ON 07-01-2013 . THE REGISTRY IS DIRECTED TO ISSUE NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE PARTIES THROUGH RPAD. ACCORDINGLY THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSE SSEE IS ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY TH E ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9-11-2012. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA SINGH) (DINESH KUMAR AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED : 9-11-2012 RK.: MA 313/MUM/2012 3 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT , CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4. CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5. DR D BENCH 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI